Review Of Town Charter Back On Table

Selectmen Have Approved A Charter Revision Commission, But, As Of Friday, No Members Had Been Named To The Panel.

August 18, 2007|By CHARLES PROCTOR; Courant Staff Writer

CROMWELL — Four years after voters rejected radical reforms to the town government, including adding a town manager and replacing the board of selectmen, officials are again eyeing revisions to the town charter.

The board of selectmen has approved the creation of a charter revision commission, but as of Friday no commission members had been named. First Selectman Paul Beaulieu, a strong advocate for charter reform, said Friday he will soon begin sounding out officials and residents for recommendations.

And this year's town budget allocated $525 to charter reform -- pocket change in a budget that totaled $12.5 million, but enough to pay for a clerk to record future commission meetings.

According to the town charter, the board of selectmen must review the charter at least once every five years. But the board does not have to create a charter revision commission, and proponents of charter reform hope to capitalize on that mandated review to propose changes similar to the ones put forth in 2003.

That year, the charter revision commission proposed replacing the board of selectmen, which then consisted of five members, with an elected nine-member town council and an appointed town manager.

The proposal also would have abolished the police commission and the board of finance, and given central authority over the town budget to the council.

The last time the charter was revised was 1993, when the board of selectmen made mostly procedural changes, said Darlene DiProto, the town clerk. The current town charter was adopted in 1975.

The 2003 revision proposal was defeated by a vote of 1,705 to 1,185. But advocates of charter reform have continued to insist that Cromwell's current system of government is too antiquated and ponderous to keep pace with the town's rate of growth.

They also charge that the selectman system allows townspeople to elect candidates who do not always have a strong understanding of issues facing the town. And proponents say a town manager would give some consistency to long-range development, which currently is dictated by the first selectman and can change when the seat switches hands.

``If I get voted out in November, everything I've started to work on is gone,'' said Beaulieu. ``My long-range capital plan? Gone.''

``The idea that you can take one citizen, whose only qualification is that he got one more vote than the other guy, and put him into [the first selectman's] office no longer makes sense,'' Beaulieu added.

But charter revision opponents say the town meeting format is a sacred New England tradition that provides an effective system of checks and balances against political power and allows townspeople to have a direct say in their government.

They also question whether a new charter would concentrate too much power in the hands of a town manager who is not beholden to voters.

Michael Gengler, the chairman of the board of finance and a leader in the effort to defeat charter revision four years ago, acknowledged the current system does not always move ``at the speed of light.'' But he added that the close scrutiny residents are afforded of town politics makes up for that.

``I would hope the people would take a very close look at the advantages they have now in the form of government that currently exists,'' he said.